3:59 p.m.
Fedora multi-arch [1] is a
good idea that is not receiving the emphasis it should. In fact, most
people do not even know it exists and I wonder why not give a little
more emphasis on this download option. maybe adding one more entry in "Formats"
when downloading[2] .
What do you think?
[1] - http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/releases/17/Multi/
[2] - http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-options#formats
--
Henrique "LonelySpooky" Junior
http://about.me/henriquejunior
4:10 p.m.
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:59:16 -0700 (PDT)
Henrique Junior <henriquecsj(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Fedora multi-arch [1] is a
good idea that is not receiving the emphasis it should. In fact, most
people do not even know it exists and I wonder why not give a little
more emphasis on this download option. maybe adding one more entry in
"Formats" when downloading[2] .
What do you think?
These were originally for ambassadors only to use at events.
I have no objection to making them more known, however, I think they
should be tested and produced in the same way other Fedora images are.
In the f17 cycle they were not tested by QA at all, and sadly, the
multi-install iso is broken. This led to useless media and everything
looking bad. ;(
so, if we are going to make them, they should get tested, produced and
distributed (including signed checksums) like every other image we
produce. IMHO.
kevin
4:20 p.m.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
These were originally for ambassadors only to use at events.
I have no objection to making them more known, however, I think they
should be tested and produced in the same way other Fedora images are.
In the f17 cycle they were not tested by QA at all, and sadly, the
multi-install iso is broken. This led to useless media and everything
looking bad. ;(
so, if we are going to make them, they should get tested, produced and
distributed (including signed checksums) like every other image we
produce. IMHO.
Yes, please, before release these DVDs, check QA control, DVDs are money
that wasn't unused by these error. I am an ambassador affected by a little
problem. On vmlinuz and syslinux, has got 0. This 0 both do cannot boot.
You need edit GRUB kernel lines and remove 0 to work....
--
Álvaro Castillo
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Netsys
Linux user #547784
9:15 p.m.
I know that the guys in QA have a lot of work to do already, but is there
any chance of multi-arch to receive more attention in the near future?
2012/9/12 Álvaro Castillo <netsys(a)fedoraproject.org>
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
> These were originally for ambassadors only to use at events.
>
> I have no objection to making them more known, however, I think they
> should be tested and produced in the same way other Fedora images are.
>
> In the f17 cycle they were not tested by QA at all, and sadly, the
> multi-install iso is broken. This led to useless media and everything
> looking bad. ;(
>
> so, if we are going to make them, they should get tested, produced and
> distributed (including signed checksums) like every other image we
> produce. IMHO.
>
Yes, please, before release these DVDs, check QA control, DVDs are money
that wasn't unused by these error. I am an ambassador affected by a little
problem. On vmlinuz and syslinux, has got 0. This 0 both do cannot boot.
You need edit GRUB kernel lines and remove 0 to work....
--
Álvaro Castillo
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Netsys
Linux user #547784
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
--
Henrique "LonelySpooky" Junior
9:20 a.m.
We discussed it in FAmSCo and I also spoke with Fedora QA guys. They're
willing to do the testing. It's not particularly difficult. What they
would appreciate is building those ISOs for RC so that they can test it
before the final release. So far, the multi-arch ISOs have been built
only for the final version.
Jiri
Henrique Junior píše v St 12. 09. 2012 v 23:15 -0300:
I know that the guys in QA have a lot of work to do already, but is
there any chance of multi-arch to receive more attention in the near
future?
2012/9/12 Álvaro Castillo <netsys(a)fedoraproject.org>
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Kevin Fenzi
<kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
These were originally for ambassadors only to use at
events.
I have no objection to making them more known,
however, I think they
should be tested and produced in the same way other
Fedora images are.
In the f17 cycle they were not tested by QA at all,
and sadly, the
multi-install iso is broken. This led to useless media
and everything
looking bad. ;(
so, if we are going to make them, they should get
tested, produced and
distributed (including signed checksums) like every
other image we
produce. IMHO.
Yes, please, before release these DVDs, check QA control, DVDs
are money that wasn't unused by these error. I am an
ambassador affected by a little problem. On vmlinuz and
syslinux, has got 0. This 0 both do cannot boot. You need edit
GRUB kernel lines and remove 0 to work....
--
Álvaro Castillo
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Netsys
Linux user #547784
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
--
Henrique "LonelySpooky" Junior
9:43 p.m.
On 2012-09-14 7:20, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
We discussed it in FAmSCo and I also spoke with Fedora QA guys.
They're
willing to do the testing. It's not particularly difficult. What they
would appreciate is building those ISOs for RC so that they can test
it
before the final release. So far, the multi-arch ISOs have been built
only for the final version.
I actually have a proposed matrix for testing the 'multi' images
(there's multi-desktop as well as multi-arch) under review ATM, it got
delayed somewhat due to the Alpha testing rush, but we'll try and get it
done for Final.
We don't absolutely need to have multi ISOs for RC - we'd only need
that if the plan is to release the multi ISOs simultaneously with the
other ISOs. Another plan that'd work just as well is to do the release
as normal and then build and test the multi ISOs just after, in the
slack week before release or whatever.
BTW, Dennis - you don't need a DL burner and DL discs to use the
multi-arch ISO, really...an 8GB (or maybe 16GB) USB stick will do just
as well ;)
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
10:30 p.m.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:59:16 -0700 (PDT)
Henrique Junior <henriquecsj(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Fedora multi-arch [1] is a
> good idea that is not receiving the emphasis it should. In fact, most
> people do not even know it exists and I wonder why not give a little
> more emphasis on this download option. maybe adding one more entry in
> "Formats" when downloading[2] .
>
> What do you think?
...
so, if we are going to make them, they should get tested, produced and
distributed (including signed checksums) like every other image we
produce. IMHO.
In F17 signed checksums were added.
In F18 they should be tested if all goes well.
https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/307
Distributing them in the same way as other images has some issues due
to the large amount of additional space that would require on mirrors.
I think it would be nice to advertise them somewhere on get-fedora and
on the verify page as well.
John
12:18 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:59:16 -0700 (PDT)
Henrique Junior <henriquecsj(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Fedora multi-arch [1] is a
good idea that is not receiving the emphasis it should. In fact, most
people do not even know it exists and I wonder why not give a little
more emphasis on this download option. maybe adding one more entry in
"Formats" when downloading[2] .
What do you think?
The main reasons we dont put them with the regular media and dont give
them any attention is two fold, 1 they are dual layer images, which
means you need to have a dual layer burner and dual layer media to burn
them. which is more expensive than single layer media last I looked.
and the second and more important reason is mirrors. from time to time
we already hear complaints about how much disk we use on mirrors. We
consume large amounts of disk already these images duplicate the media
already of the mirrors but we cant hardlink them since the images are
embedded into another image in the multi images. They are great for
ambassadors and events and giving to people to test things out, but its
a fine balance we need to keep. when I was first asked to create the
multi images it was under the understanding that it would be for use at
fedora events by ambassadors only. There is no way that Im going to put
them on the main mirror without consulting with the people that run the
mirrors first.
the reason it is not known to most people and why its not recieveing
any emphasis is by design.
Dennis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlBRbI8ACgkQkSxm47BaWfde2QCfZRTGXCD0McxF+KiAKYGfkmAZ
KpEAn3ZRvH4N8hTLxdRQBX35M41fsqL1
=RmH2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
8:08 a.m.
Once upon a time, Dennis Gilmore <dennis(a)ausil.us> said:
when I was first asked to create the
multi images it was under the understanding that it would be for use at
fedora events by ambassadors only. There is no way that Im going to put
them on the main mirror without consulting with the people that run the
mirrors first.
I haven't actually downloaded and looked at one of these multi-arch
images, but one thing that might be nice (and not too much of a load on
mirrors) would be to make a multi-arch/multi-image netinst/rescue image.
How do you create the multi-arch image (i.e. what tools/commands)?
--
Chris Adams <cmadams(a)hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
8:43 a.m.
On 09/13/2012 09:08 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
I haven't actually downloaded and looked at one of these
multi-arch
images, but one thing that might be nice (and not too much of a load on
mirrors) would be to make a multi-arch/multi-image netinst/rescue image.
How do you create the multi-arch image (i.e. what tools/commands)?
http://fedorapeople.org/cgit/spot/public_git/multiboot-media-creator.git/
~tom
==
Fedora Project
5:20 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
On 09/13/2012 09:08 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
> I haven't actually downloaded and looked at one of these multi-arch
> images, but one thing that might be nice (and not too much of a
> load on
> mirrors) would be to make a multi-arch/multi-image netinst/rescue
> image.
> How do you create the multi-arch image (i.e. what tools/commands)?
http://fedorapeople.org/cgit/spot/public_git/multiboot-media-creator.git/
Btw. do we have/is anybody working on SB support for multiboot medias? The
main idea of having SB is specially for these medias distributed on events.
R.
~tom
==
Fedora Project
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
11:58 a.m.
On 09/17/2012 06:20 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> On 09/13/2012 09:08 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
>> I haven't actually downloaded and looked at one of these multi-arch
>> images, but one thing that might be nice (and not too much of a
>> load on
>> mirrors) would be to make a multi-arch/multi-image netinst/rescue
>> image.
>> How do you create the multi-arch image (i.e. what tools/commands)?
>
> http://fedorapeople.org/cgit/spot/public_git/multiboot-media-creator.git/
Btw. do we have/is anybody working on SB support for multiboot medias? The
main idea of having SB is specially for these medias distributed on events.
I've talked about it with Matthew Garrett and Peter Jones. We hope to
have something that creates SB supported multiboot media before F18 GA.
(It will probably not look anything like my old code, because the
"lorax" component in anaconda does a much better job of most of it.)
~tom
==
Fedora Project
4:07 p.m.
On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 06:20 -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> On 09/13/2012 09:08 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
> > I haven't actually downloaded and looked at one of these multi-arch
> > images, but one thing that might be nice (and not too much of a
> > load on
> > mirrors) would be to make a multi-arch/multi-image netinst/rescue
> > image.
> > How do you create the multi-arch image (i.e. what tools/commands)?
>
> http://fedorapeople.org/cgit/spot/public_git/multiboot-media-creator.git/
Btw. do we have/is anybody working on SB support for multiboot medias? The
main idea of having SB is specially for these medias distributed on events.
Oh, right. So I need to add BIOS/EFI/SB testing to the matrix. sigh...
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
6:24 p.m.
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 06:20 -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> Btw. do we have/is anybody working on SB support for multiboot medias?
> The main idea of having SB is specially for these medias distributed on
> events.
Oh, right. So I need to add BIOS/EFI/SB testing to the matrix. sigh...
Yet more work just for that freedom-destroying Restricted Boot nonsense. :-(
Kevin Kofler
4248
days inactive
4253
days old
13 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
Adam Williamson -
Chris Adams -
Dennis Gilmore -
Henrique Junior -
inode0 -
Jaroslav Reznik -
Jiri Eischmann -
Kevin Fenzi -
Kevin Kofler -
Tom Callaway -
Álvaro Castillo